Lemmy Introduces 'Motorheadphones'

artist: motorhead date: 01/10/2013 category: wtf?
I like this
voted: 33
Lemmy Introduces 'Motorheadphones'
You might not expect to see Lemmy at a gadget show, but by the looks of it, neither did he. He was at CES, an annual technology show, presenting the official Motorheadphones - a new line of which will be available in the US from April. Watch the video below to see the Motorhead singer out of his element. They aim to suit the mid-range sound of rock music, and counter the popularity of bass-heavy "Beats By Dre" headphones that made Dr. Dre the highest earning musician of 2012. Certain Motorheadphones will include a microphone remote control for your smartphone too. There are nine headphones in the new line, with six of them being in-ear models costing between $50-60. The full-size headphones will cost between $100-130. In an interview shown below, Lemmy says the industry hasn't made rock-ready headphones in the past "because they're a--holes". That changed when the company Sandberg And Brand brought the idea to the band. "We told them what to do very specifically," said Lemmy. "And we threatened them with terrible violence if they didn't get it right, so I'm sure they got it right." He later joked that he really does hope they got it right, because "it sucks killing people." Watch this short interview to see Lemmy ridicule a journalist for asking silly questions:
Submit your story new
More motorhead news:
+ Motorhead Have Their Own Whisky Now General Music News 09/24/2015
+ Lemmy Is Back! Motorhead Triumphantly Return to Stage After a Series of Cancelled Concerts General Music News 09/09/2015
+ Motorhead Have Launched Their Own Line of Sex Toys WTF? 09/09/2015
+ Motorhead's Lemmy Is Recovering From Lung Infection, Band Ready to Return to the Road General Music News 09/08/2015
+ 'I Can't Do It' - Lemmy Cancels Texas Motorhead Show Three Songs In General Music News 09/02/2015
+ Lemmy Cuts US Show Short Due to Health Concerns General Music News 08/28/2015
+ view all
Your captcha is incorrect